I must say, she does make some good points in this article:

[snip] After enjoying ephemeral highs and spending binges, you suffer crashes that culminate in brief, unsuccessful stints in rehab. This cycle repeats itself every five to 10 years, as the rest of the country looks on with a mixture of horror and amusement. We’d feel sorry for you if you didn’t constantly flip us the bird.

Instead, we’re making bets on how long it will be before your next meltdown. Oh, wait—you’re already melting down.

You’ve racked up nearly $70 billion in general obligation debt, and that doesn’t include your $500 billion unfunded pension liability. Your own analysts predict you’ll face a hole of at least $80 billion over the next four years. [snip]

This reminds me of something a friend of mine who lives in California told me. A family member of hers didn’t understand how a business person like Meg Whitman could possibly govern California. As in, what would she know about running a state?

Huh?

How is it that I know that California has one of the largest economies in the WORLD (8th, down from 6th), but someone who lives there doesn’t get that? Isn’t a business person EXACTLY who you would want to try and pull your state up out of its flirtation with bankruptcy?

To continue with Ms. Finley’s piece:

[snip]It’s not as if you don’t recognize that you’ve got problems. Roughly three-quarters of you say you’re headed in the wrong direction, according to a recent survey by the Public Policy Institute of California. You’re even more depressed than Illinois and New York, and you’ve got sunshine 10 months of the year!

You appropriately give your government low marks—28% approval for outgoing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, 16% for the legislature—yet you continue to re-elect the politicians who got you into this mess. Not a single incumbent state legislator lost re-election this year, including one Democrat who died a month ago (no joke). What’s scarier is that you’ve just given almost all of the keys to statewide offices to Democrats.

Jerry Brown will be your new (old) governor. This is the man who acted as a gateway drug to your spending addiction three decades ago when he gave public-sector employees collective bargaining rights. Helping enforce your wacky laws will be Lt. Gov-elect Gavin Newsom, the San Francisco mayor who flouted state law by allowing same-sex marriage. On the plus side, he has nice hair and loves you just the way you are…{snip]

Isn’t that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different outcome? I’m pretty sure it is. And no doubt, that is why Ms. Finley concluded her article with this:

[snip] We’ve tried to help you, California. Some spent millions on campaigns to entice you to change your reckless behavior. And you told them to kick rocks.

So here’s our final warning: When you inevitably crash and burn, don’t count on us to bail you out.(Click HERE to read the rest.)

Amen to that. Whatever happens to you next, California, you brought it squarely on yourself. Time to grow up, and take responsibility for your actions (same goes for Lindsey Lohan).

And while we are talking about insanity, how about Massachusetts re-electing Barney Frank? No, I am not just talking about his post-election rant, but how many of you knew that his partner was busted in 2007 for growing marijuana? Not just was his partner, James Ready busted for it, but Frank was PRESENT at the time of his arrest. Oh, but wait – it gets better. In Jonah Goldberg’s very good piece on Frank, Frank claimed that he “is not a great outdoorsman,” so you know he, um, didn’t recognize that the plants in front of him just happened to be pot ’cause he just doesn’t know about plants and stuff. Riiiiggghhhttttt.

But it gets even better (I tell you, this Goldberg article is a wealth of hilarious information about Barney Frank – that is, if you think an elected official breaking the law repeatedly is funny). Yes, this also has to do with one of Frank’s partners, and it’s a doozy:

[snip] Twenty years earlier, Mr. Frank endured another controversy when his one-time partner, personal aide and roommate was revealed to be running a prostitution service out of Mr. Frank’s home. The Massachusetts congressmen insisted he hadn’t noticed anything amiss until informed by his landlord. [snip]

Are you freaking kidding me?? And this guy is SILL in office? I’m sorry, but what the hell is wrong with the people in Massachusetts that this guy keeps getting elected?

I mean, personal stuff aside (and holy moley), even more than the above is his involvement with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, about which I have written previously. Not for nothing, but helping to send our country down the tubes economically is no small thing:

[snip] And when Mr. Frank helped fuel a housing bubble that nearly crippled the economy for a generation, he again failed to notice anything was awry until it was obvious for all to see. [snip]

But here is the crux of the matter with Mr. Frank (and a few other elected officials, say Rangel, Waters, et al):

[snip] While lesser men, perhaps those not dubbed the “brainiest” man on Capitol Hill by congressional staffers, might worry about accountability, Mr. Frank considers it an affront, given his personal and professional record. In short, Mr. Frank has a very solid record of obliviousness, denial and entitlement.[snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

I’ll say. The same can be said for “Call me SENATOR, General” Boxer, and a host of other folks sitting in Congress. I reckon we can add Nancy Pelosi to the “oblivious” team given her desire to run for the Minority Leader position after many Democrats lost their jobs as a result of her heavy-handed, tone-deaf leadership. Yikes. Clearly, she thinks the “shellacking” the Democrats received in the recent election had nothing to do with her.

Oh, wait – she’s from California. Yeah, okay – given the Lindsey Lohan-ness of that state, I guess this makes sense. It’s not her with the problem, it’s everyone else, I guess. Gotcha.

At some point, we have to stop the insanity. We have to stop keeping the same people in office who got us into the big mess in which we find ourselves. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi both have a great deal to answer for in terms of where we are economically, yet both will be returning to The Hill.

All I can say is, don’t come crying to the rest of us when things continue to go horribly wrong, especially you, California – you had your chance. And you blew it.

Senator Lincoln is the one Democrat in this bunch, and I have to say, I am THRILLED she beat Halter. As you no doubt have heard, Halter was supported by MoveOn.org, and the big unions, which poured MILLIONS of dollars into Arkansas (around $10 million), so her win is a big push against the power of the unions, as well as the far left agenda. Here she is celebrating her win:

Lincoln isn’t done – she has a strong challenger in November, but beating the organized union and MoveOn.org backed candidate is huge, make no mistake. It can also be construed as a bit of a referendum on Bill Clinton v. Obama. Clinton endorsed Lincoln, and the Unions/MoveOn are Obama backers. Maybe the Old Dawg still has it…

Nikki Haley, with the backing of both Gov., Sarah Palin and First Lady (of SC) Jenny Sanford, won the vast majority of votes (49%) with her closest competitor, Gresham Barrett, at 22%. Here is Nikki Haley after the election:

Should Haley win come November, she will be the first woman governor in SC, and the second Indian American governor in the US (along with Bobby Jindal).

Meg Whitman talks about her win, and her upcoming race against Jerry Brown (or “Gov. Moonbeam,” as Karl Rove referred to him on “Fox & Friends Weds. morning). In her speech, Whitman gives a shout-out to Carly Fiorina on her win to face Barbara Boxer:

And speaking of Carly Fiorina, here she is in her speech following her win, a win which will pit her against long time senator, Barbara Boxer. She returns the favor to Whitman, with a “Holla” to her, too:

Sharron Angle, the Tea Party backed candidate, will be facing off again st Harry Reid in the Fall. Oh, I cannot begin to tell you how badly I want her to beat Reid. Even when I still considered myself a Democrat (before 5/31/08), I was not a fan of Reid’s, and my opinion of him has only gone down from there. Here’s Angle after her win:

Wow. Again, what a night. I might add, I have said a number of times, that after the Democratic Party eviscerated the best candidate they could have had to be the first woman president, I have no doubt that the first woman president will come from the Republican Party.

Honestly, it has been interesting to me to see how the Republican Party seems to support its women in positions of power far more than the Democrats do. You know, the party that claims to be the party for women. After the misogynistic treatment of Clinton by the DNC itself, compared to the treatment by the RNC with Palin, as well as other powerful women in the RNC, I just knew the Demos had blown their chance in a big, big, big way. Oh, sure, the Democrats have a few women senators and representatives, but none of them are on a par with Clinton. Hell, Obama is not on a par with Clinton, never will be (I think he knows that, too – that’s why he was always putting her down to try and build himself up).

When you look at a field like this, all of these powerful, successful women who are Republicans, you just know that our first woman president is going to come from this kind of group. That is assuming Hillary Clinton is telling the truth when she says she will not run for president again, though since Obama has made such a mess of things in such a short period of time, I am not sure she COULD win in this climate.

November will be must see with Boxer having a strong, accomplished woman like Fiorina facing her, Reid having Angle facing him, Whitman against “Gov. Moonbeam,” and Sheheen having the very popular Haley against him. Things don’t look great for Lincoln against her Republican opponent, though. Maybe Bill will show up for her again…

Stay tuned – November is not that far away!

UPDATE: Gov. Palin also endorsed Susanna Martinez (R) for Governor of New Mexico. Martinez also won big Tuesday night. Here is Gov. Palin talking with Megyn Kelly about the BP oil crisis, and near the end, she discusses the Primary results, especially the role her endorsements played:

In other words, Palin does not take credit for her endorsements making that much of a difference with the wins of the “Mama Grizzlies” – wow. What kind of politician is she, anyway? Ahem.

Anyway, the next few months should prove to be exciting. Can’t wait to see how all of this plays out!

UPDATE #2: And Libby Mitchell won in Maine to represent the Democratic Party(h/t to Yttik). From sea to shining sea, the women are on the rise. Wow!

Fortunately, though, some people (besides us) are seeing Obama for who he is as this article highlights (h/t to LisaB), “Obama, The Thin Skinned President“. I have been saying it for ages – Obama is an incredibly petulant, immature, arrogant, narcissistic person who seems to want the perks of the job, and none of the responsibility. Hell, if Bush had said something like this, it would be ALL OVER the headlines. I would have been writing about that, too. But Obama? You know the drill: “Leave Barry ALLOOOONNNEEEE!”

Spare me.

Except these guys didn’t, thank heavens:

In their book “The Battle for America 2008,” Haynes Johnson and Dan Balz wrote this:

[Chief political aide David] Axelrod also warned that Obama’s confessions of youthful drug use, described in his memoir, Dreams From My Father, would be used against him. “This is more than an unpleasant inconvenience,” he wrote. “It goes to your willingness and ability to put up with something you have never experienced on a sustained basis: criticism. At the risk of triggering the very reaction that concerns me, I don’t know if you are Muhammad Ali or Floyd Patterson when it comes to taking a punch. You care far too much what is written and said about you. You don’t relish combat when it becomes personal and nasty. When the largely irrelevant Alan Keyes attacked you, you flinched,” he said of Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate opponent.

I thought of this memo after reading the comment by Sen. Pat Roberts after he and other Senate Republicans had a contentious 80-minute meeting with the president on Tuesday. “He needs to take a Valium before he comes in and talks to Republicans,” Roberts said. “He’s pretty thin-skinned.”

Sen. Roberts is being too generous. Obama is among the most thin-skinned presidents we have had, and we see evidence of it in every possible venue imaginable, from one-on-one interviews to press conferences, from extemporaneous remarks to set speeches.

The president is constantly complaining about what others are saying about him. He is upset at Fox News, and conservative talk radio, and Republicans, and people carrying unflattering posters of him. He gets upset when his avalanche of faulty facts are challenged, like on health care. He gets upset when he is called on his hypocrisy, on everything from breaking his promise not to hire lobbyists in the White House to broadcasting health care meetings on C-SPAN to not curtailing earmarks to failing in his promises of transparency and bipartisanship.
In Obama’s eyes, he is always the aggrieved, always the violated, always the victim of some injustice. He is America’s virtuous and valorous hero, a man of unusually pure motives and uncommon wisdom, under assault by the forces of darkness.
It is all so darn unfair.

Not surprisingly, Obama’s thin skin leads to self pity. As Daniel Halper of The Weekly Standard pointed out, in a fundraising event for Sen. Barbara Boxer, Obama said,

Let’s face it: this has been the toughest year and a half since any year and a half since the 1930s. (Emphasis mine)

Really, now? Worse than the period surrounding December 7, 1941 and September 11, 2001? Worse than what Gerald Ford faced after the resignation of Richard Nixon and Watergate, which constituted the worse constitutional scandal in our history and tore the country apart? Worse than what Ronald Reagan faced after Jimmy Carter (when interest rates were 22 percent, inflation was more than 13 percent, and Reagan faced something entirely new under the sun, “stagflation”)? Worse than 1968, when Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. were assassinated and there was rioting in our streets? Worse than what LBJ faced during Vietnam — a war which eventually claimed more than 58,000 lives? Worse than what John Kennedy faced in the Bay of Pigs and in the Cuban Missile Crisis, when we and the Soviet Union edged up to the brink of nuclear war? Worse than what Franklin Roosevelt faced on the eve of the Normandy invasion? Worse than what Bush faced in Iraq in 2006, when that nation was on the edge of civil war, or when the financial system collapsed in the last months of his presidency? Worse than what Truman faced in defeating imperial Japan, in reconstructing post-war Europe, and in responding to North Korea’s invasion of South Korea?

That isn’t “thin-skinned” – that is DELUSIONAL. He honestly thinks he has had more to deal with in the past 80 years than Roosevelt during a little thing he may have heard of, World War II??? Or how about Vietnam? The WORLD TRADE TOWERS??? Seriously? Wow. Yep, I’d say he’s delusional. Back to the article:

In his autobiography “Present at the Creation,” Dean Acheson wrote about the immensity of the task the Truman administration faced after war ended in 1945, which “only slowly revealed itself. As it did so, it began to appear as just a bit less formidable than that described in the first chapter of Genesis. That was to create a world out of chaos; ours, to create half a world, a free half, out of the same material without blowing the whole to pieces in the process.”

For Obama to complain that the problems he faces are so much worse than any other president in the last 80 years is stunningly self-indulgent, to say nothing of ahistorical.

With Obama there is also the compulsive need to admonish others, to point fingers, to say that the problems he faces are not of his doing. Oh, sure; on occasions there are the grudging concessions, like in Thursday’s press conference devoted to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, where Obama says, “In case you’re wondering who’s responsible, I take responsibility” to ensure that “everything is done to shut this down.” But those words are always pro forma, done reluctantly and for tactical political reasons, a rhetorical trick that is meant to get him off the hook. As recently as last week, Obama, in the Rose Garden, was implicitly blaming the previous occupant of the White House for the explosion of the offshore rig Deepwater Horizon [Obama remarks linked here].

The president’s instincts are by now obvious to all: deflect blame, point fingers, and lash out at others, most especially his predecessor. We know from press reports (see here and here) that the strategy for the Democrats in 2010, two years after Obama was elected president, is to – you guessed it – blame George W. Bush.
What explains all this is hard to know. But it’s clear he has adopted an image of himself as something rare and remarkable, a historic figure of almost super-human abilities. “I am absolutely certain that generations from now,” Obama said during the summer of his presidential run, “we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.”
“We are the ones we have been waiting for,” Obama and his aides said constantly during the campaign.

Hmmm. Yes, this simply adds credence to my contention that he is delusional. He really does seem to think he is some kind of Messiah figure. The whole “rise of the oceans began to slow” (because it was loaded down with oil, apparently) thing is just scary shit. There is no other way to describe it. And yet his “Resistance Is Futile” Obots didn’t bat an EYE at this Messianic statement. What does that say about them?? Oh, I think we all know that, too. And they walk among us. That’s pretty damn scary, too. They think he’s dreamy, after all, because they haven’t bother to really look, or to believe their own eyes and ears when faced with a ton of information to the contrary. So here we are, stuck with this man:

President Obama’s more unattractive personal qualities probably won’t wear well with the electorate. Americans tend to tire of those who are look back rather than ahead and are always blaming others for the problems they face.

Barack Obama — a man who was as unprepared to be president as any man in our lifetime — has over the last 16 months shown that he is overmatched by events. His poll numbers continue to drop, his health care proposal is becoming less rather than more popular, the oil spill in the Gulf is badly eroding his image for leadership and competence, and his party has been battered in election after election since November. We have now reached the point where Democrats are running against Obama and his agenda in order to survive (witness Mark Critz in Pennsylvania).

We can hope that Obama, an intelligent man, learns from the errors of his ways. But the great danger in all of this is that in the face of his troubles Obama and his aides become increasingly defensive, display a greater sense of entitlement and even a touch of paranoia. When arrogant men lose control of events it can easily lead to feelings of isolation, to striking out at critics, to bullying opponents, and to straying across lines that should not be crossed.

And so the president needs to surround himself with people who can tamp down on the uglier impulses within his administration, who are willing to tell Obama that the lore created by him, Axelrod, Plouffe, and Gibbs during the campaign has given way to reality, that cockiness is not the same as wisdom, and that spin is no substitute for substantive achievements. And Obama needs someone who has standing in his life to tell him that the presidency is a revered institution that should not be treated as if it were a ward in Chicago.

The ingredients are in place for some serious problems down the road. Those who care for the president need to recognize the warning signs now, sooner rather later, before it becomes too late, for him and for the nation.

“Intelligent”? Why oh why do we keep hearing THAT meme? How has he proven this “intelligence” thus far, I’d like to know? Tell me. Oh, sure, he got the DNC to support him, or the DNC PICKED him, more like it, knowing what an empty suit he is, and could be molded to do their bidding. But that isn’t necessarily “intelligence.” He couldn’t come up with his own policies, for crying out loud, so resorted to stealing from the REAL intelligent person in the race, then got the MSM to give him the credit. Again, not “intelligent.” There are other words for that. Corrupt, unethical, morally bankrupt (oh, sorry – that’s two words), conniving, duplicitous, and I could go on. Feel free to add your own. But none of those in and of themselves are markers of intelligence.

Bottom line though, is this: What in the hell is WRONG with this man? HOW in the hell did he get the most powerful job in the world?? WHO would want him to have this much power? And how are we going to recover from him being president? These are the questions with which we must wrestle, and so, so many more. Wow. “Thin-skinned” is the very least of what Obama is…

For immediate release
For additional information please contact
Steve Wolff
+1 858 695-0460
Steve@wolffconsultingservices.com

Re: The Lessons of Flight 253

As the “Christmas Bomber” once again showed us – fortunately without loss of life – today’s passenger checkpoint, which was designed to find the guns and knives of the 1970’s hijacking era, is woefully inadequate for today’s IED threat. Putting our hope into body imaging systems alone is likewise foolhardy. Only a layered approach combining intelligence and passenger information with a careful selection of data-redundant and data-integrated technologies will have a chance of countering the IED threat.

While all travelers must be screened, they do not need to be screened to the same level. For watch-list and some normal passengers, one out of 3 or 4 checkpoint lanes should be converted to a High Security Lane, which uses intelligence and passenger data coupled with effectively selected, integrated technologies for primary- and especially, secondary search. Everyone else would be screened by baseline methods.

The current security system only screens bag-by-bag or passenger-by-passenger and does not integrate passenger and scanner data to permit detection of a possible threat dispersed across one or more individuals. A layered data-integrated approach represents the best option for detecting and deterring such threats.

Several post-911 initiatives have been proven to lead to real, measurable security improvements but many aviation security experts believe that the TSA is not strategically addressing the above shortfalls, focusing instead on adding more “boxes”. A change of focus, mentality and organization at the TSA is urgently needed; otherwise the next bombing attempt may well succeed.

Sincerely,

The Association of Independent Aviation Security Professionals

Steve Wolff – Former VP Product Development, InVision Technologies, Inc.

R.Adm. Cathal Flynn – Former FAA Associate Administrator for Security

Douglas R. Laird, former Director of Security for Northwest Airlines

Jim Welna – Former Airport Police Chief at Minneapolis Airport; former Security Committee Chair of the Airports Council International

Peter Reiss – Former IFALPA Security Chairman and Representative to International Civil Aviation Organization Panels. Retired NWA Captain.

Larry Johnson – Former Deputy Director for Transportation Security and Anti-Terrorism Assistance at the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism

After watching the reporting by the usual suspects in the media, who are turning these protests into orchestrated, manufactured outrage, it’s clear that having a number of town hall meetings where those reps either chose not to participate in one or who chose to have a conference call instead, will help prove that they are merely trying to discredit these protests and undermine the citizens true feelings about the health care legislation. Or how Senator Boxer ridiculed citizens voicing their concerns as trying to “hurt our president” and too well dressed for this NOT to be orchestrated

:

Another point that should be put out there for all to see is that during the primary and general election, it was Obama, himself, who told his supporters to have debates with those who did not support him and “get in their face.” Here is a reminder of Obama saying that, along with some other actions by his supporters

:

More importantly, we want citizens to realize how important it is for them to participate in democracy and recognize how important they are in making these reps accountable and to expose their total indifference to the citizens’ concern, not to mention their total lack of knowledge of exactly what’s in the bill. This is a pivotal moment to increase citizen involvement in “taking to the streets” and keeping the pressure on. The longer citizens stay engaged in these protests, the less the MSM can dismiss them as “astro turf” (i.e., not real grassroots concerns), as Nancy Pelosi refers to them in this clip

:

Ms. Wynne is:

asking citizens in those towns where the representatives have chosen NOT to have a town hall meeting or worse, canceled them, to “BE THE MEDIA” by organizing and conducting town hall meetings themselves and having a public discussion about what they don’t like about the health-care bill and any of the other bills that have been rammed down our throats and videotape the event. In particular, they should make it clear that they are having the town hall meeting despite their representative’s choice to not have one or to cancel one. That should be made clear at the beginning, and then say that they would not be silenced.

Then request that clips of these events be sent to NQ, here, and other websites of their choosing in order to make the people’s outrage at not being listened to be seen and heard by other citizens, so that we know that this isn’t just a group of fringe groups being sent out to disrupt town hall meetings.*

It’s an end-run around the MSM’s attempt to ignore and not report what the people are really feeling about the Obama Administration’s policies.

Now word is coming that unions are being sent in to counter those who oppose this plan. And videos are already rolling in, including footage of union members (SEIU) getting into it with Tea Party protesters.

This is our country, and we have every right to speak out, to dissent, to question. And we have the right to speak out without fear of harassment, violence, or intimidation by those in power or their surrogates. We have the right to demand accountability of those whom we have elected to represent us, and that they REPRESENT US. That is their job, after all.

So, are you game? If so, feel free to send this post to whatever sites you frequent, and let’s get this thing rolling.

If this pattern doesn’t make you stand in line the very minute your polls open on November 4, I don’t know what will.

Recently I posted a piece on how the organized the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) and the CCDS Marxist-Leninist party are working hard for Obama too–from Chicago, of course. The Real Barack Obama has also recently reported that Chicago’s Marxist Party is also working hard for Barack Obama.

Well, The Real Barack Obama blog now informs us that we can add the Communist Party to the list.

In shades of the late 60s and the early 70s, I see a Barack Obama pattern here that has little to do with Democracy. Let’s just say these people don’t wave the American flag a lot or enjoy Democracy as we know it.

Toss in an Obama Cold Call Center In Gaza City, an endorsement and campaign contributions from Hamas, Ethnic Cleansing Cousin Odinga, a crazed Jihad-loving Zbigniew Brzezinski as his top foreign advisor, endorsementa from Iran and North Korea’s currently comatosed “Dear Leader,” and I would say we have a real problem here in the candidacy of the still-unvetted Barack Obama, wouldn’t you? I’d say we’re talking about a guy who is planning Change You Simply Cannot Believe. I mean, it’s a good thing Stalin and Guevara aren’t still alive or they would be endorsing Obama too.

The Real Barack Obama has the full story here on the recent Communist Barack Obama endorsement. Here are some quotes:

Libero Della Piana is New York State chairman of the Communist Party USA, former national organiser of the party and a member of the CPUSA’s 140 strong National Council.

Like virtually all of the CPUSA’s several thousand members and supporters, Della Piana is working to elect Barack Obama to the US Presidency.

…snip…

Comrade Della Piana sees the upcoming US election as an opportunity to change the direction of the US.

From the CPUSA’s People’s Weekly World blog, September 5, 2008

Della Piana This Labor Day working people and their families in New York State are in an exciting and challenging moment. For the first time in years, the labor movement together with its broad movement allies, has the potential to change the course of the country in a more positive direction.

The 2008 Presidential election is historic. Not only has the Democratic Party nominated an African American as its candidate for the first time, but there have also been record turnouts in the primaries and a vibrant grassroots movement has developed.

No wonder Putin likes Obama so much.

Copyright © 2008 Uppity Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Well, golly gee – at least Mike Barnacle is trying to PRETEND like he didn’t say completely assholic things about Senator Clinton when she was running. But, hey, Mike – there’s this little thing called VIDEO!!! If someone actually DOES go back after the past 20 yrs, Mike, you’ll be in there, too. GeekLove caught what you, and others of your ilk, said in this video, which really, says it all.

I think this is exactly what we can expect with Gov. Palin from the media (no, you don’t have to watch the whole thing again – it is an outstanding video, though, and I think will be mighty prescient for the upcoming campaign season. Especially the first part, though. Now, you can just hear all of these so-called “journalists” saying she should be at home with her babies where a woman belongs, dammit!):

And for even more crapola the “journalists” are about to unload is this little story from Stephen Hayes, “The Media Descend To A New Low“:

Time’s Mark Halperin has posted an advance copy of the cover of US Weekly magazine, the tabloid published by Rolling Stone’s Jann Wenner. That cover shows a smiling Sarah Palin, holding her youngest son Trig. The screaming headline: “Babies, Lies and Scandal: John McCain’s Vice President.”

Wenner has contributed $5300 to Obama’s campaign since 2007.

The cover was sent to select news organizations by Mark Neschis, the head of corporate communications for Wenner Media and former director of television in the Clinton White House. An email from Neschis that accompanied the cover read: “Thought I would send over our Us Weekly/Sarah Palin cover story, on stands Friday, if helpful in your coverage. Might be useful as an illustration of how the news is playing out. (Us Weekly has 12 million, mostly female readers)”

“How the news is playing out.” That’s an interesting way of putting it. In one sense, it’s accurate. The mainstream media have been focused on pseudo-scandals about McCain’s running mate. Does it really matter at all that Palin’s husband, Todd, had a DUI in 1986? Who cares? And yet I’ve seen and heard news organizations mention — even discuss — the issue several times over the past couple of days.

The “news is playing out” that way because irresponsible journalists publish cover stories promoting “Babies, Lies and Scandal,” without any evidence of an actual “scandal.” Maybe US Weekly will publish news of an actual “scandal” by Friday, when the magazine is scheduled to hit the newsstands. But the three it mentions on its cover are not scandals. (“Under attack, admits daughter, 17, is pregnant” and “Investigated for firing of sister’s ex-husband” and “Mom of Five: New embarrassing surprises.”)

There are legitimate questions about how Palin was vetted. But many news organizations are using the vetting issue as an excuse to make insinuations about Palin’s family and her role as a mother. Instead of asking whether McCain knew that Palin wanted “an exit plan” from Iraq in December of 2006, for example, reporters are obsessing about Bristol Palin’s fiancé and whether Sarah Palin can serve as vice president and be a good mother.

It’s ironic, of course, that the same establishment news organizations consumed by such tabloid issues not long ago refused to investigate reports that John Edwards was having an affair and had a child out of wedlock. Why? The story was originally broken by the National Enquirer and deemed too tawdry to touch. And, perhaps as important, Edwards was running for the Democratic nomination for president, with an agenda favored by the liberal media establishment. (RRRA here – I do not believe the media is “liberal,” given their kid glove treatment of Bush since 2000. I do think they have shown tremendous bias FOR Obama, though.)

Stephen F. Hayes is a senior writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

Holy cow. What in the hell is the MATTER with these people?

But as low as the media has sunk, it is NOTHING compared to this article by Erick Erickson that came out last night: “Democrats Release Sarah Palin’s Social Security Number.” I kid you not. Here it is, along with an update:

The Politico has received an opposition research file from the Alaska Democrats. You can read it in PDF here (the page has moved, and is not available right now).

In the file, the Democrats have released Sarah Palin’s social security number minus the last four digits. Also tied to the information are her various home addresses.

Back in 2005, Democrats used Michael Steele’s social security number to get his credit record.

It is atrocious that the Democrats would not only seek out Sarah Palin’s social security number, but release it in opposition research to the press.

We need to know who did this. We also need to know what happened. We also need to know if it was used to bolster the Democrats’ opposition research.

When it happened to Michael Steele, it turns out the Democrats knew about it and did nothing.

They cannot not take action now.

UPDATE:

The Alaska Democratic Party says it did not release the information. From Ben Smith, at the Politico, I got this:

Our story doesn’t say that “Alaska Democrats” gave us that document. It was a document prepared for Tony Knowles two years ago. We haven’t revealed our source.

You should also note that it’s a partially REDACTED social security number. That seems relevant. If less sensational. It’s missing four digits.

Here is the key take away: Yes, the SSN is redacted and people can pay for themselves.

Now, here are additional points:

If the AK-Dems didn’t do this, who did? Obama? The DNC? Who? They’re releasing the whole thing now and letting the media make hay of it.

Why didn’t the SSN get fully redacted?

It’s ironic the party that thinks only Republicans invade privacy, invaded the privacy of Sarah Palin enough to learn her social security number and distribute it to the media.

HOLY SHIT. Could this POSSIBLY be Democrats doing this kind of thing?? Am I really that naive that this has been their MO all this time and I just did not see it? Is this the New Party of which Donna Brazile spoke, one that emulates Chicago Politics on a National Scale?? Like I said before, I am not an apologist for Sarah Palin, and I have voted the Democratic straight-ticket every single time I have voted, and that has been every single time there was an election, but this – this is so wrong on so may levels I am ALMOST speechless about it. Almost. For those who say it isn’t that big of a deal, it would be EASY to get her full social security number – EASY. It wouldn’t even TAKE that long, either. These thugs, these miscreants who would put out this information are the lowest form of pondscum. They need their comeuppance and NOW. The DNC and Obama must speak out on this.

I’m not holding my breath, though. This is now the Democratic Party that steals votes from one candidate to give to another in broad daylight, so why should I think they would feel an OUNCE of shock about this? All it does is show how completely terrified they are of Sarah Palin; how incredibly sexist they are; how much they devalue women (you should SEE all of the stories out about her – many of them focus on how she should take care of her family instead of doing what she’s doing. Funny, I don’t remember these people saying the same thing to Mitt Romney with his huge brood or ANY other MALE candidate, including OBAMA, who has children. Nope – only the women get this kind of detestable punditry.); and how thuggish they have become from top to bottom. It is disturbing beyond belief.

By the way, Senators Clinton, Murray, Cantwell, Boxer, et. al, Rep. Pelosi, et. al, and Governor Gregoire – you need to speak out against this rampant sexism directed at Sarah Palin, and you need to do it NOW. The DNC and the media are taking women back 40 years with these blatant attacks on women. The DNC used to be the party for women. Now, it has become the Party that attacks women – for being women. I never thought I would see this kind of treatment at this point in my life, but unfortunately, I was sadly mistaken. All I can say is I have to hope that when Obama loses this November, there will be a full-fledged housecleaning of the DNC and some of the Congressional Democrats who were the worst offenders this season.

In the meantime, whoever exposed Governor Palin’s SSN, whether it be anyone affiliated with the Demcorats or not, has sunk to a low I never thought possible. The media has sunk to a new low in terms of women. The DNC is going right along with it. And they need to stop. Now. NOW.

What possible excuse can Obama invent to justify his continuing mistreatment of Hillary and his disrespect for the greatest president for African-Americans since Lyndon Johnson passed the civil rights and voting rights acts?

In case Obama has forgotten, under the Clinton administration, poverty was reduced 25 percent—one-quarter—with more than 7 million people moved from welfare to work—and 22 million new jobs created—and family incomes and real wages increased for the first time in a generation—and crime reduced by more than 25 percent.

Yes, that Bill Clinton, the one Obama smeared as a racist.

Yes, that Hillary Clinton, the one Obama smeared as racist, too, for stating the historical truth that Lyndon Johnson was essential in passing the civil rights acts and that we need a president on the side of civil rights to make them real.

And if it so happens that Obama is elected, he will be judged by those Clinton benchmarks—a president he dismissed as not producing change compared to…Ronald Reagan—who blocked progress for African-Americans.

Now what possible alibi can the Obama campaign offer for continuing to poke Hillary and those 18 million voters in the eye?

Chuck Todd, NBC’s political editor, explained today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. According to Big Tent Democratic, on Talkleft.com, Todd has been talking to the geniuses of the Obama campaign. Here’s what they told him:

On Morning Joe, Chuck Todd said that the “feeling in Chicago,” presumably referring to the Obama campaign, is that Hillary Clinton is seeking treatment that she would never have given Barack Obama had the roles been reversed. If they REALLY believe that, then they are fools. If Hillary Clinton were the nominee, Barack Obama would have been the vice presidential nominee a month ago. I can not believe Todd is passing on this foolishness.

But Chuck Todd is not the problem. He’s just relating the unbalanced state of mind of Obama’s campaign.

Let’s follow their whacked out thinking. They fantasize that Hillary would cut them out and dump on them if she were the nominee. Therefore, it’s legitimate for them to cut her out and dump on her and her supporters. Make sense?

Had Chuck Todd consulted with any psychiatrist he would have learned that the Obama campaign suffers from what Freud identified as neurotic “projection.” Projection is a defense mechanism by which negative impulses, motives and actions are displaced onto others, especially on those serving as the objects of those negative feelings and attacks. Projection can be a fantasy rationalization and lead to full-blown paranoia. It is also obviously a form of denial.

Unless treated, the symptoms will worsen.

Obama’s campaign doesn’t have a theme song, except maybe for Ludacris’ foul-mouthed jingle calling Hillary a “bitch.”

Wouldn’t this one from Gnarls Barkley be an appropriate theme song for the Obama campaign?

Check out this video of Gnarls Barkley’s great song, “Crazy.”

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 42% of the vote while John McCain earns 41%. That’s the lowest level of support measured for Obama since he clinched the Democratic Presidential nomination on June 3. Obama’s support peaked at 48% with data released on June 8, 9, and 10. During that same time frame, McCain’s support has remained steady in the 40% to 42% range (he’s had just one day a point below that range and two days a point above it).

When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 46% and McCain 45%. With leaners, Obama reached 50% support in mid-June and was at 48% or 49% every day from June 13 until July 10. Since then, he has reached the 48% level just once while polling consistently at 46% or 47% (see recent daily results). Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day.

McCain is viewed favorably by 57% of voters, Obama by 53%. McCain is currently supported by 86% of Republicans and holds a modest–four percentage point—lead among unaffiliated voters. Obama earns the vote from 77% of Democrats (see other recent demographic highlights).

There are also ominous signs in polling on foreign policy credentials:

Obama is currently on a European tour designed to bolster his foreign policy credentials here at home. Currently, voters trust McCain more than Obama on both national security issues in general (53% – 39%) and on Iraq in particular (49% – 37%).

You’ll recall our July 15th story, “Rasmussen Reports: Hillary Fares Better Against McCain”:

From the Rasmussen Reports analysis page:

McCain fares better against Obama than he does against two other prominent Democrats. New York Senator Hillary Clinton leads McCain by eight points, 50% to 42%. Former Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2000, leads McCain 50% to 43%.

Thank god there is still time for superdelegates to nominate Hillary Clinton.

You can get a handy list of the superdelegates to contact in Imv’s story, “ACTION! Contact These Superdelegates.”

Barbara Boxer Speaks to the Senate on Immunity, Law and Truth

At this point in time to give retroactive immunity kind of makes a mockery of the fact that we’re supposed to be a government of laws, not people. We are a government of laws. Do we then come back and say, “Oh, by the way, there’s three laws over here that we don’t really like, so we’re just going to say to the people that broke them it’s OK? ‘Cause we’ve looked at it and we think it’s OK?” This is America. We are a country of laws.

~snip~

Last week we celebrated the day we adopted the Declaration of Independence, Independence Day, July 4th. In that historic document is the following phrase: “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” The consent of the governed. That means the law has to be behind you when you undertake to do something like this administration did. They didn’t care about the consent of the governed. They didn’t care about the law that was in place.

Since it seems likely that this bill will pass the Senate I find it important to describe what this bill does so that everyone knows. Because the outrage I might expect isn’t coming from anywhere significant.

Below are a few primers. Instructive and entertaining.

FISA Amendments Act Basics

1. The law retroactively legalizes a massive electronic operation to spy on the personal communications of millions of Americans – within the United States

2. The law allows physical searches of Americans’ homes and places of work without a search warrant or any other proof that anyone being spied upon is suspected of any crime at all

3. The law allows the same kind of unaccountable spying online and by telephone

4. Under the FISA Amendments Act, the only person with the ability to stop the spying is the same person who actually orders the spying to take place: The Attorney General of the United States.

Please enjoy this excellent video that will clear everything up.

67 days

And while you are at it, take a look at this call to arms.

Please Vote NO on FISA!

PUMAs won’t take this lying down. Just Say No Deal.